The Addams Family - Film Series Retrospective

There are a lot of ways that one could describe the characters who are the focus of today’s retrospective. Some might call them “creepy” and “kooky”. Others might say they’re “mysterious” and “spooky”. And yet, most would agree that “they’re altogether ooky”. Yes, folks, today we’re celebrating the classic franchise that is The Addams Family. It all began in 1938 when cartoonist Charles Addams first published a series of cartoons for The New Yorker which introduced audiences to the titular family of Morticia, Gomez, Wednesday, Pugsley, Uncle Fester, Grandmama, Thing, Lurch the butler, and Cousin Itt. The cartoons served as a satire of the all-American family by having the Addams Family fully embrace their macabre lifestyle without any regard for those who find their antics disturbing. Suffice it to say, they were a huge hit, resulting in the characters transitioning into other forms of media. Arguably their most famous spin-off is the classic TV series starring Carolyn Jones and John Astin as Morticia and Gomez that ran from 1964 to 1966. Aside from that, there were also a few animated series made by Hanna-Barbera (with one of them notably featuring a then 11-year-old Jodie Foster as Pugsley) and more recent works such as a Broadway musical in 2010. But for the purpose of today’s retrospective, we’ll be focusing on the characters’ appearances in feature films which, since the ’90s, have primarily consisted of two major cinematic incarnations. First, there’s the 1991 live-action adaptation that was followed by a sequel in 1993, resulting in a pair of films that have very much become staples of the Halloween programming blocks for networks like Freeform. Then, there’s the franchise’s recent animated outing that came out last year and is set to get a sequel sometime next year (you know, unless COVID-19 subjects it to the same issues that have plagued countless other upcoming releases). And so, without further ado, prepare to snap your fingers to Vic Mizzy’s iconic theme song as we look at the Addams Family films.

THE ADDAMS FAMILY (1991)

We begin with the first live-action film adaptation of The Addams Family, which was released in 1991 and was directed by Barry Sonnenfeld. Before he went on to direct films like the original Men in Black trilogy, this film served as his directorial debut after starting out in the industry as a cinematographer on many of the Coen brothers’ early films like Blood Simple and Raising Arizona and other classics such as Big and Misery. Unfortunately for him, though, the film’s production was consistently plagued with problems such as health issues for multiple members of the cast and crew, a change in cinematographers that even forced Sonnenfeld to step in and do it himself for a stretch of time and, most infamously, a change in the distributor. Originally handled by Orion Pictures, the studio ended up selling the film to Paramount out of fear that it would be another commercial flop for them at a time when they were struggling financially (sure enough, they would ultimately end up filing for bankruptcy that year). But upon its release, the film did quite well at the box-office as it grossed over $191 million worldwide on its relatively modest $30 million budget, and while its overall critical reception was mixed at best, it’s clear that it managed to be a hit with audiences and it’s easy to see why. Overall, the film does a great job of capturing the madcap atmosphere of the original show and the delightfully dark and twisted visual style of Charles Addams’ original cartoons right down to some spot-on recreations of key moments from the latter. Plus, it’s all bolstered by an excellent ensemble headlined by Raul Julia, who is delightfully theatrical as Gomez, and Angelica Huston, who’s a practically pitch-perfect fit for the role of Morticia. This makes up for what is easily the film’s biggest shortcoming in that anything that doesn’t directly involve the Addams family (namely, everything regarding the main antagonist, a loan shark who tries to disguise her adopted son as  the long-lost Uncle Fester to steal the Addams’ fortune) is a lot weaker by comparison. Ultimately, though, the film still manages to be a solidly entertaining (albeit far from perfect) romp that, at the end of the day, ends up being one of the better adaptations of an old television sitcom from the ’60s, a subgenre that notably trended in the ’90s as evident from other TV-to-film adaptations such as The Flintstones, The Beverly Hillbillies, and Dennis the Menace.

Rating: 3.5/5

ADDAMS FAMILY VALUES (1993)

Fueled by the first film’s success at the box-office, Paramount quickly developed a sequel, Addams Family Values, which hit theaters in 1993 and saw the return of both director Barry Sonnenfeld and most of the main cast from the previous film (save for Judith Malina, who was replaced in the role of Grandmama by Carol Kane). The film also took on a much different tone compared to its predecessor as it was more reliant on its macabre humor rather than its efforts to replicate the zany antics of the TV series, which is ultimately the catalyst behind it being one of the rare cases of a genuinely superior sequel. Yes, thanks to this pivotal change in direction, Family Values is a lot more consistent with its humor and, really, is just a better-made film, for the most part. Much of this has to do with it having a far superior villain than its predecessor thanks to Joan Cusack’s delightfully campy turn as Debbie, a gold-digging femme fatale who marries Uncle Fester with the intent of killing him to collect the inheritance. The only real downside, though, is that, because the film is largely focused on Fester and Debbie’s relationship, it results in Raul Julia and Angelica Huston not getting as much to do this time around as Gomez and Morticia. But at the very least, the film makes up for this by simultaneously giving Christina Ricci a larger role as the precociously cynical Wednesday. Ricci had already made a great impression in the role back in the first film, but thanks to this film’s subplot in which Wednesday and Pugsley are sent away to an overly chipper summer camp and, naturally, cause a whole bunch of chaos there, she’s far and away its biggest standout. With all this in mind, I can safely say that if you were among those who found to be the first live-action Addams Family film to be a bit underwhelming, I believe that you’ll probably get a lot more out of this one. It truly is a great example of a sequel that managed to improve upon its predecessor in almost every possible way and I wouldn’t be surprised if this was the film that was largely responsible for the positive reputation that this duology has maintained over the years.

Rating: 4.5/5

THE ADDAMS FAMILY (2019)

And finally, we cut to nearly three decades later when the Addams Family made their return to the big screen in a new animated feature, which served as the second outing for the directing duo of Conrad Vernon and Greg Tiernan after the smash hit that was 2016’s Sausage Party. Obviously, these two films are quite different from each other when it comes to both their target audiences and their overall sense of humor, but in this case, Vernon and Tiernan do manage to maintain much of the consistent humor that we saw from Sausage Party. Yes, there are quite a lot of modern references (as is admittedly the case with a lot of modern adaptations of older bits of source material), but for the most part, they don’t completely overtake the film to the point where they overshadow anything that made this franchise so popular in the first place. In other words, this new film does just as great of a job as the live-action films did when it comes to capturing the zany and macabre nature of the titular family, especially when it comes to its overall visual style. While there was some… to be perfectly blunt, rather hyperbolic backlash towards the Addams family’s character designs (which seemingly only stemmed from most folks’ fondness for the live-action films), these designs brilliantly match the look of Charles Addams’ original cartoons. And just like the live-action films, they’re brought to life by a terrific ensemble, from Oscar Isaac and Charlize Theron as Gomez and Morticia to Chloe Grace Moretz and Finn Wolfhard as Wednesday and Pugsley. Really, the only ‘negative’ thing that I can say about this film is that the main plot is your standard ‘fish out of water’ story with some blatantly obvious payoffs. Despite this, though, this new take on The Addams Family does manage to be a solidly entertaining family flick, and while I didn’t end up seeing this when it first came out exactly one year ago, I’m certainly interested in seeing what will come from next year’s sequel.

Rating: 4/5

*Snap Snap*

Stranger Things: Season 1 Review

(DISCLAIMER: THERE WILL BE SOME MINOR SPOILERS BUT NOTHING TOO MAJOR!)

In 1997, entrepreneurs Reed Hastings and Marc Randolph created the DVD-by-mail rental service known as Netflix. After a full decade of operations, the company then established its own video streaming service in 2007, allowing customers to watch their favorite films and TV shows whenever they want. And while the video streaming service is still going strong today thanks to its vast library of distributed content, nowadays Netflix has become known for producing its own line of films and TV shows. Many of these ‘Netflix Originals’ have gone on to attract considerable critical acclaim and have also covered a wide array of genres that have been geared towards an equally wide range of audiences, from the prison-set dramedy Orange is the New Black to the numerous shows that have been produced in conjunction with Marvel Studios. And in the summer of 2016, Netflix debuted a show that has gone on to become one of their most popular projects to date, Stranger Things. Created by Matt and Ross Duffer, AKA The Duffer Brothers, Stranger Things is a supernatural sci-fi horror series that’s heavily influenced by 80’s pop culture, most notably the works of director Stephen Spielberg and author Stephen King. And thus, with the highly anticipated second season premiering this weekend, it’s time to take a look at this cultural phenomenon which does, indeed, live up to all the hype that has surrounded it.  

The year is 1983. On a quiet fall night in the town of Hawkins, Indiana, a young boy named Will Byers (Noah Schnapp) suddenly disappears under mysterious circumstances. The following day, a statewide search is initiated by Hawkins Police Chief Jim Hopper (David Harbour), and despite the growing amount of evidence that suggests otherwise, Will’s mother Joyce (Winona Ryder) and his older brother Jonathan (Charlie Heaton) remain optimistic about the chances of him being found. During this difficult time, Will’s three best friends, Mike Wheeler (Finn Wolfhard), Dustin Henderson (Gaten Matarazzo), and Lucas Sinclair (Caleb McLaughlin) also get involved in the search as well. And as the lot of them soon find out, Will is somehow trapped in an alternate dimension known as the Upside Down where he is being pursued by a vicious monster, which obviously puts more pressure on his friends and family to rescue him before it’s too late. While all this is going on, a mysterious young girl who calls herself Eleven (Millie Bobby Brown) escapes from a nearby government facility. Mike, Dustin, and Lucas end up befriending her and discover that not only does she possess special telekinetic abilities, but that she may also prove to be vital to the process of rescuing Will from the Upside Down.

Now, admittedly, because I wasn’t around during the 80’s, I think it’s safe to say that I don’t have as strong of a connection to the various facets of pop culture that are referenced in this show compared to others. And yet, even with that said, you don’t have to be an 80’s kid to fully appreciate this series for all the great things that it does. Because while it’s obviously influenced by the likes of Stephen King and Steven Spielberg, with a King-like supernatural premise and the kid-oriented narrative that’s often seen in Spielberg films, Stranger Things is ultimately bolstered by a highly engaging story that’s fully steeped in emotional poignancy. Oh sure, this show’s got mysterious alternate dimensions, badass telekinetic children, and terrifying demonic creatures to satisfy the science-fiction and horror crowds, but at the end of the day, this show is mainly about a young boy who goes missing as his friends and family do whatever they can to find him. This ultimately ties into one of the main things that made several of the films and stories that this series is influenced by so memorable; they inserted fantastical elements into a grounded human story, allowing us to connect to the characters even when they get into crazy scenarios. And thanks to a solid visual aesthetic and a deeply-layered plot, the Duffer Brothers manage to give us a story that feels incredibly fresh even when considering everything that’s come before it.

Sure enough, one of the best elements of this show is that you do end up being as fully invested in its wide array of well-layered main characters as much as you do with the main plot, and this applies to each of the show’s 3 age-based tiers of protagonists. Starting off with Stranger Things’ excellent batch of young protagonists, Mike, Lucas, and Dustin are quite the endearing trio and they have terrific camaraderie with each other as they band together to find their friend Will. Of the three, Mike is arguably focused on the most due to the strong bond that he develops with Eleven that even ends up spawning a sweet little bit of ‘young love’. But that doesn’t mean that Lucas and Dustin don’t get as much quality material to work with, as Lucas gets a nice character arc revolving around his initial distrust of Eleven, which ends up causing a rift in his friendship with Mike, while Dustin serves as the lovable ‘middle man’ of the group. Plus, he also gets some of the best lines of dialogue (“I'm just going to get some chocolate pudding! I'm telling you, lunch lady Phyllis hoards that s***!”). Speaking of Eleven, Millie Bobby Brown is easily the biggest standout of the entire show as the badass but tragically sympathetic telekinetic child who loves to eat Eggo waffles. Brown conveys so much despite only having around 42 lines of dialogue, which are mostly made up of one-word exclamations like ‘mouth-breather’.

Moving over to the main teenaged characters of the story, there’s Jonathan, who gets just as involved as his mother does when it comes to searching for his younger brother, and Mike’s older sister Nancy (Natalia Dyer), who ends up becoming tied to the whole ordeal when her best friend Barb (Shannon Purser; and yes, as everyone else on the internet has said, Barb is a memorable supporting character despite only appearing in about three episodes) disappears as well. The two of them eventually team up to deal with the situation, and despite that one creeper scene early on in the season when Jonathan takes pictures of Nancy and her friends while at a party (don’t worry, he improves after that…), they do share a nice chemistry that could potentially blossom into something else in future seasons. Finally, there are the two main adults of the series, Joyce Byers and Chief Jim Hopper. Admittedly, some of Joyce’s early ravings come off as being perhaps a bit too hysterical, but that does go away as the season goes on (e.g. the powerful scene in Episode 4, ‘The Body’, where she insists that Will is still alive even after a body is found). And if anything, Winona Ryder absolutely owns the role of a mother who’s fully devoted to finding her son no matter what. As for Hopper, David Harbour is great as well as the alcoholic police chief who, as we come to learn, suffered an immensely devastating personal tragedy a few years prior. Said tragedy is shown in the final episode of the season, ‘The Upside Down’, where it’s intercut perfectly with another highly emotional moment. In fact, there were a lot of great emotional moments in that episode, hence why it ended up being my favorite episode of the season.

Well, there’s not much else that I need to say about this series other than the fact that if you haven’t seen it yet, I highly encourage you to give it a watch. Like I said before, you don’t have to be an 80’s kid to fully appreciate everything that’s great about this show. With that said, though, if you are an 80’s kid, then this show delivers an excellent dose of 80’s nostalgia thanks in large part to the various bits of pop culture that it’s heavily influenced by. But at the same time, this show also delivers thanks to its strong and emotional story that’s mainly based around a down-to-earth plot of a young boy’s disappearance and the desperate search efforts made by his friends and family to find him. And this story is further elevated by a terrific ensemble cast portraying an excellent collection of likable characters that are just as well-developed as the plot. In short, it’s easy to see why this show has been such a hit amongst critics and audiences during a time where a nostalgic passion for classic films and TV shows is at an all-time high, and I look forward to seeing what happens next in the town of Hawkins, Indiana in Season 2.

Season 1 Rating: 5/5!

And that’s my review of Season 1 of Stranger Things. Thanks for following along and you can look forward to a review of Season 2 sometime in the next few weeks.

It (2017) review

In 1986, author Stephen King released what has arguably become one of his most famous stories, It. The story of a group of young outcasts who band together to fend off a terrifying creature that feeds off their fears became a major best-seller upon release. Four years later, it was adapted into a two-part miniseries which aired on ABC and starred Tim Curry in the role of the main antagonist’s primary form, Pennywise the Dancing Clown. However, due to some of the changes that were made to condense a book that is over 1,000 pages long, namely by toning down some of its darker moments to make it more suitable for television, the miniseries admittedly hasn’t aged very well. And thus, here we are now with a new adaptation of It, released 27 years after the previous adaptation (and yes, folks, if you’re a fan of the novel, then you’ll know that this number is an important one in the context of the story). Director Andrés Muschietti takes the helm this time around for what is shaping up to be the first part of a duology. Because unlike the miniseries and novel, which both intercut between events that take place 27 years apart from each other, this film focuses solely on the main protagonists when they are kids, whereas an impending second installment will shift focus to them as adults. And unlike the miniseries, specifically, this film is a dark, R-rated horror flick that’s able to delve further into the most disturbing elements of the novel. Ultimately, though, the horror elements of this new It isn't the only thing that helps make it one of the greatest horror films in recent memory. 

 

In the quiet town of Derry, Maine, seven kids begin to bond during the summer of 1989. This includes stutterer Bill Denbrough (Jaeden Lieberher), overweight Ben Hanscom (Jeremy Ray Taylor), parental abuse victim Beverly Marsh (Sophia Lillis), loudmouth Richie Tozier (Finn Wolfhard), germaphobe Stanley Uris (Wyatt Oleff), hypochondriac Eddie Kaspbrak (Jack Dylan Grazer), and homeschooled Mike Hanlon (Chosen Jacobs). Together, they form ‘the Losers’ Club’ as they all go through the perils of growing up, including the uncertainty of first love and the daily struggle of dealing with bullies. Unfortunately, for the lot of them, part of that peril also involves a terrifying creature known as ‘It’, who frequently manifests as an evil clown named Pennywise (Bill Skarsgård). As the group soon learns, ‘It’ has existed for several years, always causing chaos in Derry every 27 years by hunting children. The situation ends up getting even more personal for the group when Bill’s younger brother Georgie (Jackson Robert Scott) ends up being one of It’s many victims. Thus, when they realize that they’re the only ones who can stop the creature, the Losers’ Club bands together to combat ‘It’, as they learn that they stand a stronger chance against the monster when they stick together.

While I usually try to avoid making comparisons between different adaptations of a source material, I must say that this film immediately establishes itself as the superior take on It right out the gate. Compared to some of the cheaper-looking elements from the miniseries, this film is incredibly well-shot and boasts an excellent visual/production design, which helps to produce a chilling and suspenseful atmosphere throughout. I mean, there’s only one real instance in this film where the cinematography isn’t very good, and that’s during a fight scene near the end (don’t worry, this isn’t spoiling anything) where it gets a bit too shaky, which in turn is paired with some rather hasty editing. Ultimately, though, that’s just one brief instance in a larger film that’s so well-polished on a technical level. And as for this being a horror film, It does deliver when it comes to having plenty of hair-raising scares. Many of these scares come from the fact that, as noted earlier, the film has far more creative reign to delve into some of the darker elements of the novel compared to the miniseries, which couldn’t really cover any of that stuff being a miniseries that aired on a nationwide network. Sure, it doesn’t include everything from the novel (i.e. the infamous orgy scene which, let’s be honest, was rightfully left out in this adaptation) but, suffice it to say, there are quite a lot of disturbing moments in this story; heck, some of them don’t even involve Pennywise. For the record, though, that’s not to say that Pennywise isn’t properly utilized in this; it’s just that he’s more of an additional layer to this film’s overall creep factor.

But, of course, the key to this whole film is its ability to make us sympathize with the members of the ‘Losers’ Club’ in their endeavors against ‘It’. As such, the main protagonists are arguably the film’s greatest strength. These seven leads, predominantly consisting of newcomers save for lead Jaeden Lieberher (who’s been in several big films recently like Midnight Special) and Stranger Things star Finn Wolfhard, are all fantastic in their respective roles. Their camaraderie is terrific which, in turn, strengthens the Losers’ Club’s unity in the narrative while also giving us some bits of temporary reprieve from all the horrific moments that occur (e.g. Richie’s constant smart-ass remarks). Now, admittedly, because there are seven members in this group, some of them are focused on more than others. This is namely the case with Bill, given the whole plotline about his brother, Beverly, the lone girl of the group, and Ben, with the latter two sharing a sweet ‘young romance’ subplot. However, the film does still manage to establish all seven of the main characters and what they’re afraid of, which is then utilized by Pennywise to scare them. And on that note, what of Bill Skarsgård in the role of the Dancing Clown? Because after all, while several elements of the 1990 miniseries have aged poorly, Tim Curry’s performance as Pennywise is still considered to be the best part about it. Ultimately, though, I’d say that Skarsgård has managed to top Curry in terms of performance. Sure, Skarsgård’s Pennywise isn’t exactly humorous like Curry’s Pennywise was, but that just makes him creepier whereas Curry’s version was a tad more charismatic… well, as charismatic as a demonic clown can be, for the record.

I’ve previously stated that I’m not that big a fan of horror films. And yet, that’s the beauty of this new adaptation of It. Even someone like me who isn’t really into this genre can get something out of this film, and that’s mainly because of how well-made it is. It has its creepy moments, for sure, and they’re handled excellently thanks to Muschietti’s strong direction and a brilliantly dark atmosphere. And while I still haven’t read the original novel yet, it seems like this is a far more faithful take on it; for one thing, it isn’t afraid to delve into some of the more demented parts of the book. But ultimately, this film’s biggest strength isn’t any of its horror elements, surprisingly. Instead, It succeeds primarily because of its well-written story about a bunch of kids, portrayed excellently by the film’s young leads, who go through a traumatic experience together which effectively parallels the journey of growing up. Thus, in a time where several modern horror films often turn out to be quite mediocre, this stands as one of the genre’s greatest efforts as of late. As such, I’m very much looking forward to the planned second installment of this duology which, as stated before, will take place 27 years after the events of this film with the main characters all grown up. I do hope, though, that it ends up turning out better than the second half of the 1990 miniseries which, as I noted last time in my review of it was, unfortunately, the weaker half of the story. But if they bring back the same crew from this film for the sequel, I’d say we’re in good hands.

Rating: 5/5!